Yes, you are absolutery correct that "whenever we talk about the rights of men, we are actually in negotiation with each other." Perhaps we Libertarians (some of whom might be Objectivists, others not)do tend toward hyperbole, as did our Founding Fathers ("We hold these Truths to be self-evident..." "...certain unalienable Rights..." etc, etc.). However, I submit that a lot of us are busy negotiating every day in our effort to spread the word about the benefits of non-agression, and personal freedom and responsibility. Current and recent examples of this effort might be our candidates running for office, our members organizing candidate forums, and one of our really dedicated activists going over to City Hall and talking to as many legislators as he could in response to Fiona Ma's threat to ban campaing signs from the streets.
You are also correct that "most people understand clearly that they are not God, that they cannot choose values for other people." However, I believe that no matter what political party you join (if you choose to join any) will possess a set of core values, which the party will proselytize in hopes of acquiring adherents. In my view, that is not choosing for others, but communicating to others the benefits you perceive.
So, as you say "let's stick to the matter at hand. Negotiation for our liberty." I am all for that. Let's take every opportunity to attend town hall meetings, attend candidate forums, talk to our friends and neighbors.
Finally,when you say "we are governed by one and only one set of laws..The laws of physics," I am wondering at what point in the development of these "laws" I should feel governed by them; should I jump on to the cold fusion wagon now an avoid the rush? [ I submit that even the laws of physics might be open to negotiation.
By the way, Mike, Ayn Rand's books "Atlas Shrugged" and "We the Living" are the reason I am now a Libertarian (formerly a Republican).
Will we see you at the next LPSF meeting, ready to continue our fight for liberty?